It's interesting how this subgenre walks a line for so many readers. I gravitate towards stories where the initial dynamic is problematic, even alarming, but the emotional core becomes about dismantling that power imbalance through genuine, often painful, character growth. The 'romantic tension' doesn't come from the non-consent itself, but from the fraught space between what the characters feel compelled to do and what they secretly yearn for. A book like 'Captive Prince' gets cited a lot, and for good reason—the political intrigue and slow, grudging respect that forms between Damen and Laurent creates a magnetic pull that overshadows the ugly start. The tension is in the waiting, the questioning of every glance and reluctant act of mercy.
Another angle I see popping up is the 'fated mates' or supernatural bond trope where the non-consent is baked into the lore, like in some dark omegaverse or vampire romance. The tension there stems from the internal battle between biological imperative and personal will. The reader is pulled along by the question of whether the character's desire will ever become a choice. It's less about endorsing the setup and more about exploring a fantasy of overwhelming, destiny-driven passion where the conflict is externalized onto the rules of the world. The popular web serial 'The Last Hour of Gann' does something brutally clever with this, making the consent issues part of a vast cultural and existential chasm.
Honestly, my tolerance for this varies wildly with the author's skill. If the power dynamic stays static and the 'romance' is just Stockholm syndrome dressed up, I nope out. The tension has to transform, not just persist.